I would say that it does. Getting a bad contract with 1-2 years remaining wouldn't be bad and I could even live with 3 years remaining, if the pick(s) were high enough in their respective draft class(es). However, I wouldn't want to completely cripple the franchise's financial flexibility for the next 3-5 years, just to land a couple picks that may or may not pan out. Even if the Raps aren't likely to be major players in free agency, having no cap space for multiple seasons also severely limits their ability to make trades or even get in as minor players to help facilitate larger trades.

I was all for the trade that Cleveland made with the Clippers 2 years ago, which saw them land a top-5 pick for taking on Baron Davis' contract. Even if they didn't amnesty him, I think he only had another year left on it anyway. Had he had 3+ seaons remaining (without amnesty option), suddenly that trade looks much less appealing.

There aren't really that many bad contracts in the league right now. I'd say the guys who have more than 3 year contracts that might hurt a franchise are Johnson, Lopez, Gordon, Nene, Batum, McGee, Curry or Gallinari. I'd include Amare as well even though his contract is done in 3 years.

Brooklyn won't have picks as assets so I don't see how they could shed Johnson or Lopez. Gordon/Curry/Nene are all injury prone and they are on my list simply because of that. And I doubt a team would give away their pick just to unload these contracts - but I could be wrong. Batum and Gallinari are playing poorly this season and I do see them improving but their contracts suck. And McGee is just awful.. although we have JV so I don't see us ever getting him anyway.

IMO, "real" talent is evident from day-1. Guys like LeBron, Durant, Howard, Duncan, Shaq, Vince, etc. don't need 3+ years to learn how to dominate. Their immense skill is on display from the moment they start their NBA careers.

That's the type of talent this team needs to get out of the cellar, and I can confidently say we don't have anyone that fits this description (including Jonas).

Thank you. This is exactly what I was driving at back in the day when people were talking about guys like Bargnani, Bayless, Davis, Amir, etc and trying to argue that all they needed was some time on the floor. Either the evidence is there from day 1 (or in some of these cases, there before YEAR 5), or it is simply not there.

There aren't really that many bad contracts in the league right now. I'd say the guys who have more than 3 year contracts that might hurt a franchise are Johnson, Lopez, Gordon, Nene, Batum, McGee, Curry or Gallinari. I'd include Amare as well even though his contract is done in 3 years.

Brooklyn won't have picks as assets so I don't see how they could shed Johnson or Lopez. Gordon/Curry/Nene are all injury prone and they are on my list simply because of that. And I doubt a team would give away their pick just to unload these contracts - but I could be wrong. Batum and Gallinari are playing poorly this season and I do see them improving but their contracts suck. And McGee is just awful.. although we have JV so I don't see us ever getting him anyway.

Guys like this are like lottery tickets though. For each of them, there are many incredible players who do take a bit more development time. These late bloomers won't necessarily be superstars, but they can become all-star level talent, and that's a more realistic thing to focus on.

Still don't think they should keep the current team together though. I'm advocating going all out for 2014 draft acquisitions. I'd move anyone on this team besides JV. If we have to take on some bad contracts to get 1st round 2014 picks in the lottery range, we should do it. Those bad contracts will disappear before the prospects we could draft in 2014 do.

The problem with this mentality is the amount of money and time consumed to find out if they are the real deal or fakers. Waiting and waiting for late bloomers is a waste of the fan's time and the team's money. Developing and paying players that "can" (but not necessarily will) become all-star level talent is a waste of time. Look at Amir Johnson's ridiculous contract. Dude is in his 7th year in the league and will never be anything more than a backup PF in the NBA. He'll be making between 6.5-7.5m over the next 3 seasons. Why? Because earlier in his career he showed some 'flashes' of being the next Ben Wallace. Flashes = franchise death-trap. Andrea has shown flashes. Heck even Araujo showed some flashes. If they're not performing at a pretty high level after their first season, they will never perform at a high level. Ever.

THe only way the Raps can get an all-star calibre type of talent in my opinion is through draft. Not sure i'm willing to watch 2 straight seasons of tanking though just to have a chance to draft Wiggins. And even if we let's say finish with the worst record in 2014, there is NO guarantee that we're going to get the 1st overall pick.

The Raps only hope right now is for JV to develop faster and DeRozan to continue to improve his game. Because after those 2, there's not much talent here.

What Matt's proposing gives us a higher chance of landing that 1st pick, because we'll be acquiring as many draft picks as we can from this time until then. With the right number of moves and horrible contracts taking in, we could trade our way up to a top pick. For example, let's say the lottery rolls in and we've got the 3rd overall pick. But "back in 2012", we traded for some horribly long and expensive contract for a couple picks that ended up being the 8th and 10th picks. Now we have 3rd, 8th, and 10th picks that might be something you can trade for that #1 pick. Or if we don't get Wiggins, it still means we're bringing in 3 fairly strong prospects.

Isaiah Thomas

When I saw the name of this thread I was ready to disagree, mainly because its hard to blow up what you don't have. Blowing up generally is a strategy of mediocre teams who want to start fresh. We don't really have any veteran talent of trade-able quality that would enable us to blow it up (blow, maybe).

In my opinion there are only three players on this roster that could command a lottery pick in a trade (which says a lot about Colangelo's legacy here). They are Lowry, Demar and Valanciunas. Of the three, two are already quite young and suited to a rebuild. As for Lowry, I think trading him could make sense before his current deal runs out and he wants big raise (and before he kills one of his teammates for playing soft).

So other than trading Lowry, it looks as though we would be bringing back late first round picks. This team has shown a startling inability throughout its history to get quality out of the lottery, and I can't recall a non-lottery first rounder besides Mo-Pete that ever had any appreciable impact. So lets be clear. It is absolutely imperative that we bring in an excellent scouting, talent evaluating GM before we commence this rebuild. I know this sounds crazy, but a guy like Isaiah Thomas might be the answer (and would clearly be available). Say what you want about the guy. He has a history of drafting legit talent.

Also, I really do like your point about taking on bad contracts for picks. Its not as though we could really be any worse. In fact, the worst contracts in the league would probably amount to a talent upgrade at this point (though this would be bad for our draft position). With that in mind, I think the real ticket is players on massive contracts who are perpetually injured. How about Nene? Would Washington give up a first rounder to get out of his albatross of a deal given the plethora of young talent already on their roster? Here's hoping.

Things make look brighter if AB and JC are gone. These two need to be moved now.

In truth we should have seen this coming from the very start. JC should have been traded immediately after acquiring Lowry. We traded away a first round pick for the guy, and we kept a $10m backup point guard? Why? It made absolutely no sense then and it makes no sense right now that he's still here. I don't care that Lowry missed some time. You traded away the 2013 draft pick making the obvious assumption that you assumed this team was good enough to make the playoffs and thus render that draft pick moot, but you held on to a perfectly good trade asset.. for what? A rainy day? And now, we're 4-17 and Jose is still mysteriously on the roster. Makes absolutely no sense at all.

IMO, "real" talent is evident from day-1. Guys like LeBron, Durant, Howard, Duncan, Shaq, Vince, etc. don't need 3+ years to learn how to dominate. Their immense skill is on display from the moment they start their NBA careers.

ebrian wrote:

Either the evidence is there from day 1 (or in some of these cases, there before YEAR 5), or it is simply not there.

This theory is flawed in my opinion.

The problem with saying this, is that there are only so many players like that to go around.
And EVERY team in the league is trying to land one of these types of players.
But as Nilanka stated, they can all be counted on one hand.

Unless we're talking about players like Rudy Gay and Lamarcus Aldridge and Rajon Rondo... except .. Bargnani must have exhibited more of the 'Day-1 Evidence' in order to Garner 2nd in ROY voting over ALL of them.

Or Tyreke Evans must have simply forgotten how to play, and thus his "Extreme amount of Day-1 Evidence" is easily thrown out the window.

I don't believe for a second that a Player's future Career can be predicted by "Day-1".
Some guys you can tell will be Hall-of-Famers from Day-1, yes, I'll give you that.
But not all Hall-of-Famers were pegged to be so from "Day-1".

"That was Nasty right? Cocked that Joint back and banged on 'em." -James Johnson

In my opinion the Raptors are already going to be a horrible team for the forseeable future because they have the same management making decisions that has lead to a 5 year playoff drought and are currently in 2nd last place in the entire league with a bottom 10 offense and a bottom 5 defense.

Matt, I've been watching your gradual change in tone over the past few weeks but this does it for me. Welcome to my world.

Second bold section: You were right. So were the others. I, like many, were wrong. The problem with last year is that none of those lessons learned have stuck. This is the 2nd worst team in the league who has lost in a variety of ways to a variety of different talent. The only constants are a horrible offense/defense and losing.

I'm not really to concede that tank-mode was correct. I don't know what tank-mode really is. Can someone explain this to me? In theory I understand you want to lose all your games, but in practice is it even possible? While avoiding fines from the league, what exactly has to take place to "tank" in the NBA? The only thing I can think of right now is not signing guys like Alan Anderson and Ben Uzoh. Take those two off the team and we probably get Harrison Barnes. But aside from that -- what is tanking, really?

The problem with saying this, is that there are only so many players like that to go around.
And EVERY team in the league is trying to land one of these types of players.
But as Nilanka stated, they can all be counted on one hand.

Unless we're talking about players like Rudy Gay and Lamarcus Aldridge and Rajon Rondo... except .. Bargnani must have exhibited more of the 'Day-1 Evidence' in order to Garner 2nd in ROY voting over ALL of them.

Or Tyreke Evans must have simply forgotten how to play, and thus his "Extreme amount of Day-1 Evidence" is easily thrown out the window.

I don't believe for a second that a Player's future Career can be predicted by "Day-1".
Some guys you can tell will be Hall-of-Famers from Day-1, yes, I'll give you that.
But not all Hall-of-Famers were pegged to be so from "Day-1".

You are absolutely correct.

The issue is you are talking franchise talent. I'm looking for a legit All-Star - hell maybe 2! The more picks they get the more opportunity to be that team that does land the franchise talent - or at the very least the all-stars.

Toronto has been doing the opposite of this and look at where it has landed them. As I've been saying lately, how much worse can the Raptors actually get? The ball they are playing is not winning or enjoyable. At least last year was enjoyable. They are currently 2nd last. Bad offense. Offensive defense.

The good thing Toronto has going for it is there are already young players on the roster who are going to be solid pros - maybe more.

What is going to take to Toronto to relevancy faster:

1) muddling through the current situation for the next 2-3 years and HOPING everything works out (i think this is extremely unlikely, surprise!) when the last 5 seasons say it is going to be an epic failure? or

2) developing and playing current young players while adding possibly 4-5 high drafted players in the next 2-3 drafts to coincide with the expiration of some horrible contracts?

#1 is insanity - doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Colangelo keeps sending picks away versus getting picks back. The majority of successful GM's of late (the descendents of SA) are stock piling picks. Needless to say, sign me up for #2. I'd take the uncertainty of greatness over the certainty of a continuation of the last 5 years.

I don't believe for a second that a Player's future Career can be predicted by "Day-1".
Some guys you can tell will be Hall-of-Famers from Day-1, yes, I'll give you that.
But not all Hall-of-Famers were pegged to be so from "Day-1".

I'm not really to concede that tank-mode was correct. I don't know what tank-mode really is. Can someone explain this to me? In theory I understand you want to lose all your games, but in practice is it even possible? While avoiding fines from the league, what exactly has to take place to "tank" in the NBA? The only thing I can think of right now is not signing guys like Alan Anderson and Ben Uzoh. Take those two off the team and we probably get Harrison Barnes. But aside from that -- what is tanking, really?

When I was pushing for 'tanking' last year, I described it as this:

- significant playing time to young players that are (or could become) part of the long-term core (ie: Uzoh yes, Anderson no)
- minimal/no playing time to guys who aren't going to be on the team the following season
- trade every expiring contract / old player / overpaid player / players not projected to be part of the core for draft picks, young players (and expiring contracts if need be) - I would have tried to trade Calderon, Amir and Kleiza last year, as well as guys like Gray, Anderson, etc... something in return is better than nothing in return
- no big signings that are short-sighted (ie: Fields this past offseason)
- coaching staff and players give 100% effort, but within the confines of 'playing for the future' approach (per above)

I never wanted the team to purposefully lose or sit healthy players just to try and lose. My argument is that when teams are out of playoff contention, the approach should always change to development/evaluation of young players. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, especially when your #5 pick from the previous draft is overseas until the following season, you're had significant roster turnover and have a new coach that didn't have a full offseason/training camp to prepare for the season.

Those are the stinkiest of the stinky, in my opinion. Did I miss anyone?

I'd be ok with going after those types of players but, again, only if the quality of draft pick(s) and/or prosepect(s) coming back are worthwhile. I remember pushing for an Okafor and/or Ariza trade in the offseason (back when they had that much talked about cap space), to try and get their #10 pick, prior to NO pulling the trigger with Washington.

If a total rebuild is decided as the best approach, I think there are at least a few opportunties to get decent return from current roster players, without needed to take one of these god-awful contracts back (ie: Lowry, DeRozan, Bargnani, Ross, without even getting into multi-player packages).

I just can't see BC starting another full rebuild, unless he gets MLSE approval and the appropriate contract extension. The other option of course is to get a new GM, but in that case I'd want them in place ahead of the trade deadline, which doesn't seem likely. I suppose immediately at the end of the season could suffice, but there could be some lost opportunities then.

This is more of a joke post, but here are some markers during season 1 for a player's future.

1. No playing time, not even when it's garbage time (DNP-CD): Time for a career change.
2. Sent to D-League: Career change.
3. Only getting garbage time minutes: NBA journeyman if you can specialize (score or rebound). Otherwise there's always Russia or Australia.
4. Never started a single game, even when team was injury depleted: Journeyman if you can find a sucker like Bryan Colangelo.., otherwise, China or Europe.
5. Started some games when incumbent injured/slumping: Europe, unless you're really tall.
6. Played starter-like minutes without starting: Potential
7. Started 25% of games: Potential
8. Started more than 50% of games: Potential

Btw, if in year two you are still doing #2-5, probably should get ready to play overseas.

I'm not really to concede that tank-mode was correct. I don't know what tank-mode really is. Can someone explain this to me? In theory I understand you want to lose all your games, but in practice is it even possible? While avoiding fines from the league, what exactly has to take place to "tank" in the NBA? The only thing I can think of right now is not signing guys like Alan Anderson and Ben Uzoh. Take those two off the team and we probably get Harrison Barnes. But aside from that -- what is tanking, really?

What the Raptors did last year was tank.... they just did an awful job at it - surprise.

Tanking comes from a GM putting together an awful roster.

With a mismatched roster, glaring needs, and an overall lack of talent, losing is naturally going to happen. The Raps did all that last year but, according to BC, Casey still won too much. Now this year with enough talent, Casey is not winning enough and is in fact worse than last season.